question about PE licensing (in the USA)

most

most - but they can lose their license if they practice outside their field of expertise - which used to be defined by having five years technical experience in the particualr specific area of the project (in other words, if a PE with a mechanical engineering degree, who has little experience in sprinkler systems, signs off on one after reading five books about sprinklers, he/she would face suspension or loss of license for what we call "whoring")

The idea is that a PE, charged with the responsibility for "matters technical of life, health, and the public welfare" is supposed to know how people will use whatever the system and how it will deteriorate and what the environmental factors are - typical trauma, typical use and abuse, corrosion, etc. - is so he can design accordingly - if he doesn't know it will be used or misused by people and its environment, how can he be entrusted with "life and health"?

From: snipped-for-privacy@darrettenterprises.com (Mike Darrett)

Why the "ha!" ??? I hope you're not suggesting that Chem. E's should place their stamps on building or bridge designs. That would be a good way to get people killed.

Dan :-)

No, I was expressing amusement that a Civil stamp is needed to sign off on distillation column, air stripper and plug flow reactor designs, for instance.

Hmm... you have a very interesting point. I shudder to think a Civil would need to sign off on a Fischer-Tropsch reactor (high pressures, very exothermic reaction)... maybe that's why there aren't many Fischer-Tropsch plants in California.

Mike ;)

Well... I'm a Civil and I certainly wouldn't want to sign off on one of those!!!

Sometimes Civil's end up signing off on a project that involves many disciplines as a Civil might be managing the overall show. However, I've seen many plans where a different engineers sign off on the "appropriate" sheets for thier disciplines.

I'm in Ca. myself. I'm not aware of any law requiring a Civil's signature for what you describe. However, that's not my area, so... I obviously don't keep up with it. Of course... it would be CA if such a law existed. I believe I heard that sometime back, in CA, the law used to require that an architect be in responsible charge of high ( multi-story ) buildings instead of a Civil or other Structurally-oriented ( ME maybe ) engineer. If CA could be backward enough to have that law... I certainly can't see any reason why it can still have other backward laws. LOL

Dan :-)

Title Act vs. Practice Act... Chem Engineering is a Title Act in CA, currently...

However, that's not my area, so... I obviously don't keep

I could understand a Civil stamp being required for perhaps the soil compaction under the foundation, or any supporting trusses, definitely... but the heat transfer within the reactor?

A co-worker tells me (senior engineer), in practice, it would be an engineering firm who would be hired to do the design work... it would employ both Chem E's and Civil E's... once the Chem E's say, "yes, this will work, and yes, this is safe", the Project Manager puts his Civil PE stamp on it...

Politics as usual, I suppose.

Ah well...

Mike